4.5 Article

Risk of lymph node metastasis in patients with pedunculated type early invasive colorectal cancer: A retrospective multicenter study

Journal

CANCER SCIENCE
Volume 102, Issue 9, Pages 1693-1697

Publisher

WILEY-BLACKWELL
DOI: 10.1111/j.1349-7006.2011.01997.x

Keywords

-

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Depth of invasion in early invasive colorectal cancer is considered an important predictive factor for lymph node metastasis. However, no large-scale reports have established the relationship between invasion depth of pedunculated type early invasive colorectal cancers and risk of lymph node metastasis. The aim of this retrospective cohort study was to clarify the risk of lymph node metastasis in pedunculated type early invasive colorectal cancers in a large series. Patients with pedunculated type early invasive colorectal cancer who underwent endoscopic or surgical resection at seven referral hospitals in Japan were enrolled. Haggitt's line was used as baseline and the invasion depth was classified into two groups, head invasion and stalk invasion. The incidence of lymph node metastasis was investigated between patients with head and stalk invasion. We analyzed 384 pedunculated type early invasive colorectal cancers in 384 patients. There were 154, 156, and 74 endoscopic resection cases, endoscopic resection followed by surgical operation, and surgical resection cases, respectively. There were 240 head invasion and 144 stalk invasion lesions. Among the lesions treated surgically, the overall incidence of lymph node metastasis was 3.5% (8/230). The incidence of lymph node metastasis was 0.0% (0/101) in patients with head invasion, as compared with 6.2% (8/129) in patients with stalk invasion. Pedunculated type early invasive colorectal cancers pathologically diagnosed as head invasion can be managed by endoscopic treatment alone. (Cancer Sci 2011; 102: 1693-1697)

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available